I'm tired of hearing right-wing pundits and more than a few feminists bemoan the recent response to Sarah Palin's $150,000 wardrobe budget courtesy of the RNC.

As most of you know I am, one, so in the bag for Obama that I made the bag and two, a horrible feminist. However, I promise you neither of those have anything to do with my feelings on this matter.

In business one's brand is immeasurable. You live and die by the public's perception of your authenticity. Think it's a joke? Ask Coke about the "new Coke" campaign or Wal-Mart how their upgraded wadrobe line went over. It's not that people aren't willing to try a new cola or buy cheap chic from discount retailers. It's that people, deluged with demands for their attention, depend on a brand to save time as they make purchasing decisions. So, when a brand betrays its promise, consumers feel personally violated. In many ways, they have been.

Sarah Palin marketed herself as a PTA- attending hockey mom from middle America whose only extraordinary attribute was her extra-ordinary existance. So, when one finds out that the mom next door has almost $200,000 to blow on designer duds from retailers that wouldn't be caught dead on Main Street, USA it is not a matter of sexism or political myopia but authenticity. Palin can be as sexy as she wants to be. I myself wouldn't run for block captain of the neighborhood watch team without a carefully selected outfit. I understand being fierce. I am most in my element when I know i look my best. I could forgive Palin for wanting to upgrade her armor as she wages a nasty campaign.

What is harder to forgive is her betrayal of the brand she sold America. She's no hockey mom in matching yoga suit and ponytail. She's not even a proper feminist in a boxy pantsuit and criminally desexualized pumps. She's a high-end fashionista.

And that's ok...if that is how you introduce yourself.

The problem with Palin's expensive wardrobe is the same problem one would have with a budget line from Saks or a trendy upscale line from Payless - it's a lie. It is a betrayal of the brand. It is inauthentic. Whether it was a choice made of lack of identity or an intentional effort to manipulate the public, one cannot be sure. But, the American people have the right to wonder who, as Palin is fond of asking the other guy, "is the real Sarah Palin?"

I am one of those non-traditional (re: old) students at a traditional historically black college (HBCUs). I've bemoaned the lack of maturity, scholarship and commitment as us old people are prone to do. However, what I have seen over the past few months has been nothing short of paradigm changing.

In every class; whether it be a literature, philosophy or science class, the topic of every class discussion is this election. The conversations are littered with slang and text-speak. They are also steeped in passion and commitment. These kids - some of the most disenfranchised and historically apathetic - care. They care about energy. They care about the tone of the advertising. They care about Sarah Palin. They care. Professors can barely keep hold of the reins as students relate you tube clips, emails and facebook posts that sparked their interest. It is a sight to behold.

These kids have never been polled. They are the invisible. The cynics and the old fogeys and the historians will tell you these kids also do not vote. They would be both right and wrong. They have never voted but they do now.

Last night I got a text from a local student group about a march to the polls. Let me repeat: I got a text. At midnight. About a march to the polls.Today several thousand students on my campus WALKED to the nearest polling station to participate in early voting. The peer pressure to vote is huge. Kids are shouting out the latest Jeezy lyrics AND a quick "get your vote on, man" with equal amounts of seriousness. This is not a joke. An "I voted" sticker is the new throwback jersey and Dereon jean. Students will be holding daily marches during early voting. The get out the vote effort is one of the most organized, impassioned, revolutionary I have ever witnessed or read about.

I'm not saying the tsunami is coming. However, I am saying that all the pundits who think of history as future may be in for a huge surprise.

Get your vote on, man, indeed.

Why the Detroit Pistons should be going to the NBA finals
A statement from Detroit Pistons general manager Joe Dumars:

I wanted to say a few words about the Michigan Solution. No, not that travesty of justice. I'm talking about a fair, common-sense resolution of the Eastern Conference Finals.

Some in the media are declaring the series over because the Boston Celtics have won four of the six games played so far. But I don’t understand why, with a series this close and hotly contested, anyone would want to shut it down before we play a seventh game and have all the results in. As anybody who follows the NBA knows, a seven-game series would be good for the league, and the added competition would make the eventual victor, whomever it might be, a stronger opponent against the Los Angeles Lakers in the Finals.


It’s no great surprise that some are trying to push us out of this series. From the beginning, it’s been clear that the media and league elites have been looking for an exciting new face, instead of a team, like ours, that has proven its mettle by making it to the Conference Finals six* years in a row. We saw it in the Western Conference as well, where officials and news outlets made clear they were sick to death of the reigning champion San Antonio Spurs and behaved like cheerleaders for the media-darling Lakers. Heck, they almost managed to persuade fans that a hokey, small-town act like the New Orleans Hornets was a legitimate contender. It is safe to say that this has been the most rigged coverage in modern sports history.

But back to the series in question. Yes, Boston has won four games and Detroit only two. But it's hard to imagine a more arbitrary and undemocratic way to determine this series’s outcome than "games won." It is, after all, a bedrock value of the game of basketball that all points must be counted. But how can that be the case when every point beyond the winning point is ignored? There are literally dozens of layups, jumpers, free throws, and (yes, even) dunks that our opponents want to say don't count for anything at all. We call on the NBA to do the right thing and fully count all of the baskets that were made throughout the course of this series.

Once you abandon the artificial four-games-to-two framework that the media has tried to impose on the series, a very different picture emerges, with the Celtics leading by a mere 549 points to 539. Yes that’s right, the margin between the two teams is less than one percent—a tie, for all intents and purposes. This is probably the closest Conference Finals in NBA history, though I will thank you not to check on that.

How do we determine a winner in a series so historically close? First off, let's look at these so-called "free" throws, which are anything but. Who decides when these are to be awarded? Hard-working working-people like you and me? No, it's the officials, the league bosses, the elites. So no counting the free throws--unless and until (and I sincerely hope you guys are listening) the refs start breaking our way again. (By the way, you guys do know that Celts star Paul Pierce was involved in a stabbing a few years back, right? I only mention it because Phil Jackson is obviously going to bring it up in the Finals.)

If you take out free throws, Boston's ten-point margin in the series is whittled down to a single-digit, all-but-meaningless nine points. But this is still misleading. Let's be honest: We all know that some baskets count for more than others. (Yes, I know I was arguing for equal representation two seconds ago. What are you, Encyclopedia Brown? Chill out and try to stay current.) Take layups, for example: If you wander naively into the Finals thinking you’re going to win with layups, well don’t come crying to me when Kobe Bryant swats that lameass shit right back in your face. I know. I've been there.

So let's get right down to it: Big shots matter. It makes no difference when they happen, or who's leading at the time, or whether you're likely to make them against the Lakers, or any of that complicated nonsense. And we all know that the only real big shot is a three-pointer. So sure, Boston won more games than us, and scored more points, and made more baskets, and hit more free throws, and never tried to rewrite the rules after the fact. But we dominated them in three-point shooting, hitting 29 long ones to their 26 over the course of the series. Take this into account and it becomes apparent that we are by far the strongest competitor the Eastern Conference can field against the Lakers.

We again ask the league to consider all these facts and come to a fair solution. I’ll be holding a press conference at the Palace tonight, to which I’m inviting all Pistons season-ticket holders. I may announce our intention to drop out of the Eastern Conference Finals. Or I may not. But know one thing: If the media and league elites put the Celtics up against LA, they will lose, and we’ll be the first to say I told you so.

See you next season,

Joe Dumars (as told to Christopher Orr)

*corrected